Bishop Williamson consecrated Father Geraldo Zendejas bishop today

[ABlaine]

Zendejas and Fauré

And Dom Thomas de Aquino O.S.B. Prior of the trad Monastery of Benedictines in Brazil.
There are now four resistance bishops.

Being a "resistance" monastery, can he in good faith actually put OSB behind his name? I find it hard to believe that they're actually a part of the Benedictine Confederation.

Either way, always sad to see this particular crack widen.

There are also two Benedictine monasteries associated with the SSPX; one in the U.S. And one in France. The trad monasteries are not associated with the Benedictine Confederation; but if St. Benedict would come back to Earth, which group of monasteries would he identify as his true sons, the N.O. Federation or the trad monasteries? I would think it would be the trad monasteries.

There are trad monasteries that are a part of this congregation, as you yourself mentioned (for example much of the Solesmes Congregation which is itself part of the Benedictine congregation as a whole). I think it is disingenuous to put OSB after a name when they are clearly in conflict with the organization that that abbreviation refers to. Obviously they follow the Rule of St Benedict but that isn't what OSB is signifying.

At least in the email newsletters I don't think I've seen the Silver City monks put OSB after their names when they write the introduction letter, etc.

Either way, I don't think that the last question is really legitimate as there is no way of knowing on Earth and it is an awfully big assumption to make. What I have wondered, though, is when the SSPX finally reconciles, what will happen to their monasteries? Will they join the respective organizations for each of their orders or will it be kind of split between SSPX and the normal order?

[Michael Wilson]

re. What would happen to the other trad communities associated with the SSPX once the SSPX was regularized? That is a good question. In 1988, the plan was for the other communities to associate with their corresponding N.O. Counterparts; but these trad communities did not want to have anything to do with this arrangement. There has been talk that the trad communities would have their own commission set up in Rome to deal with them; but I haven't seen anything concrete.

[Nazianzen]

It's simply not going to happen.  Look at the official statement last July from the SSPX superiors.  They clearly are not thinking about how they can cooperate with the Modernists, and they're not idiots, so they know they cannot put out a statement like that then negotiate a deal in secret.  That kind of behavior would blow everything sky high. 

In order to head for a cooperative arrangement with the Modernists, they first have to announce that it's now a good idea, and give plausible reasons, then proceed with discussions. 

In trying to analyze this situation IGNORE everything the Vatican says, then consider only what the SSPX leadership has said, in total isolation from anything the Vatican or the Resistance has said.  That way you will get a completely different picture, and maybe the lights will come on.  I don't say this as if naivety is the best analytical tool, but because I've been observing, as well as discussing these things with the principals, for decades, and the only reason anybody thinks that the SSPX leadership is disingenuous and untrustworthy is because of obvious propaganda.  The propaganda might be well-meaning, but it's wrong-headed, and I think obviously so.  They haven't betrayed us yet, despite numerous prophecies to the contrary, and they're clearly not about to do so.  There would be CLEAR signs if they were.  Instead, all we have is divide-and-conquer tactical PR from the Vatican, and sucker reactions from the Resistance.

Don't get sucked in, people, just watch and pray.

[Elizabeth]

Nazianzen, glad you decided to continue posting here.

[tradical]

re. What would happen to the other trad communities associated with the SSPX once the SSPX was regularized? That is a good question. In 1988, the plan was for the other communities to associate with their corresponding N.O. Counterparts; but these trad communities did not want to have anything to do with this arrangement. There has been talk that the trad communities would have their own commission set up in Rome to deal with them; but I haven't seen anything concrete.

What was discussed in the mid-2000's and based on some conferences I attended, the proposed structure would incorporate all the trad communities that want to join under the 'SSPX' prelature and they would also be able to found new trad communities.

Not certain how that would work in practice ....

[George Montini]

It's simply not going to happen.  Look at the official statement last July from the SSPX superiors.  They clearly are not thinking about how they can cooperate with the Modernists, and they're not idiots, so they know they cannot put out a statement like that then negotiate a deal in secret.  That kind of behavior would blow everything sky high. 

In order to head for a cooperative arrangement with the Modernists, they first have to announce that it's now a good idea, and give plausible reasons, then proceed with discussions. 

In trying to analyze this situation IGNORE everything the Vatican says, then consider only what the SSPX leadership has said, in total isolation from anything the Vatican or the Resistance has said.  That way you will get a completely different picture, and maybe the lights will come on.  I don't say this as if naivety is the best analytical tool, but because I've been observing, as well as discussing these things with the principals, for decades, and the only reason anybody thinks that the SSPX leadership is disingenuous and untrustworthy is because of obvious propaganda.  The propaganda might be well-meaning, but it's wrong-headed, and I think obviously so.  They haven't betrayed us yet, despite numerous prophecies to the contrary, and they're clearly not about to do so.  There would be CLEAR signs if they were.  Instead, all we have is divide-and-conquer tactical PR from the Vatican, and sucker reactions from the Resistance.

Don't get sucked in, people, just watch and pray.

An astute friend of mine who also attends the SSPX pointed this out to me a while back. Since then I have watched this issue more closely, and it's true.

All the media beat-ups that appear in Catholic news are consistently one sided. The rumors that a Rome-SSPX "deal" is imminent usually/always come from some Ecclesia Dei source.

Every now and then some prominent conservative or pseudo-trad blogger, journalist or Vatican commentator puts out an opinion or something to say the same. Sure, they will quote something Bishop Fellay has said, but the source they quote him on is always old, never current or specifically related to the moment.

Like clockwork, trad Catholics react by scrambling over blogs and comment boxes claiming that "Bishop Fellay has sold us out!". This is precisely the reaction the impostors in Rome want. They want division, confusion, suspicion and fracture among those left who practice the Faith and receive Sacraments that are certainly valid.

Cardinal Mueller (or whatever he is) comes out and says to the SSPX "help me fight the modernists". The gall is beyond belief. This man publicly denies several core dogmas of the Faith and then says something like this, as if to get the SSPX on "his side".

He actually does them a favor, showing himself to be a duplicitous collaborator in the goal of destroying what's left of the resistance (small r) to the conciliar revolution.

So, ignore the media beatups and the modernists, whose cunning and spite know no bounds. They know that Catholics generally are of good will, and they cynically play on this and use it to their advantage.

[Greg]

Bishop Fellay hasn't exactly helped with his secret preambles and generally behaving like a Swiss banker.  Knowing the SSPX was choc full of conspiracy nuts, he should, if he understood his audience, have played it with a very straight bat from the get go.

Had he explained what, when, why, how, where and who, like any decent salesman does, he would have kept supporters onside and potentially have won MORE supporters from conservative ranks.  He's running a religious society, not MI6.

The deal hinges on 1 thing.  Trust.  No SSPX supporter trusts Rome.

If you are trying to build trust the last thing you do is behave like Secret Squirrel.

[bigbadtrad]

In trying to analyze this situation IGNORE everything the Vatican says, then consider only what the SSPX leadership has said, in total isolation from anything the Vatican or the Resistance has said.  That way you will get a completely different picture, and maybe the lights will come on.  I don't say this as if naivety is the best analytical tool, but because I've been observing, as well as discussing these things with the principals, for decades, and the only reason anybody thinks that the SSPX leadership is disingenuous and untrustworthy is because of obvious propaganda.  The propaganda might be well-meaning, but it's wrong-headed, and I think obviously so.  They haven't betrayed us yet, despite numerous prophecies to the contrary, and they're clearly not about to do so.  There would be CLEAR signs if they were.  Instead, all we have is divide-and-conquer tactical PR from the Vatican, and sucker reactions from the Resistance.

Don't get sucked in, people, just watch and pray.

The last line I agree with, but the previous paragraph I do not. Why would 9 priors of France take a stand without consulting leadership? Because they don't trust the leadership and it's obvious, very very obvious why this is so. If those 9 priors said the the very same thing 13 years ago they would have been applauded, now they hide and pounce to tell the truth at once knowing they would fall like dominoes if they tried it alone.

There is something seriously changing in the SSPX and everyone who has gone for years sees it. When the Synod was out destroying the family the SSPX in St. Marys never once criticized the dangers in the document. Instead they gave a 3 week series of sermons on marriage. Only during the procession did we pray for the Synod before it happened, but never once criticized the dangers therein, just that God's will is not always done in these synods.

I'm no longer in St. Marys and the priest we have now where I live thinks the NO is ok, Vatican II is misinterpreted, and other things that are bizarre. Fr. Vassal gets St. Nicholas Church and taught dogmatic theology in the seminary after he led the debacle in Post Falls with terrible advice to the families and leadership. Madrid has a modernist church so bad even modernists would cringe. I know many good priests in the SSPX and they are worried. One got so red in the face in anger at what's happening I felt I wasn't an alien living on a weird planet anymore.

[QuaeriteDominum]

Bishop Williamson has been excommunicated twice.

What is the world record?

Twice has to be fairly rare.

5 times to be exact. Each are automatic by canon law for every illicit consecration. Although since one cannot be excommunicated while already in that state, I guess it is twice.

Archbishop Thuc consecrated a bevy of bishops so he has +Williamson beat in that department.

[QuaeriteDominum]

When the Synod was out destroying the family the SSPX in St. Marys never once criticized the dangers in the document.

So you are saying that for the better part of a year you attended every one of the 8 or so Masses offered every Sunday at St. Mary's and can attest to the fact that no priest EVER criticized the Synod?

You sound a bit like many "resistance" folks who think that if an SSPX priest does not bash the Novus Ordo, altar girls, and CITH at least once a month he is losing his faith or sliding into modernity.

As a Trad, how often do you need to hear a priest tell you that the Novus Ordo is bad before you cannot resist the temptation to go and try it out?  Do you know anyone in Trad-dom who does not know that the Synod was/is evil? So now St. Mary's sin is that they give a Traditional Catholic conference on marriage?

This is messed up.

BTW, I have never been to St. Mary's.

[Greg]

Yes, but wasn't Bishop Williamson excommunication lifted and then he was excommunicated again?

[QuaeriteDominum]

Bishop Fellay hasn't exactly helped with his secret preambles and generally behaving like a Swiss banker.  Knowing the SSPX was choc full of conspiracy nuts, he should, if he understood his audience, have played it with a very straight bat from the get go.

Had he explained what, when, why, how, where and who, like any decent salesman does, he would have kept supporters onside and potentially have won MORE supporters from conservative ranks.  He's running a religious society, not MI6.

The deal hinges on 1 thing.  Trust.  No SSPX supporter trusts Rome.

If you are trying to build trust the last thing you do is behave like Secret Squirrel.

I would bet that if +Fellay had a do-over, he would have changed course on a few things. One of them is how +Williamson was handled.

But Secret Squirrel or not, I predict that a deal will not be made if not ratified by the SSPX General Council of Superiors and Elders.

Remember that he is making decisions based on the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Order members of the SSPX. John Q. Public is not directly affected by his decisions unless John Q. attends one of their chapels. And in that case, there is no contract or promise that the laity will get a vote in priestly decisions. One votes with one's feet, in that case.

[QuaeriteDominum]

Yes, but wasn't Bishop Williamson excommunication lifted and then he was excommunicated again?

Right .. 4 consecrations since his original excommunication was lifted.

[Kaesekopf]

Bishop Fellay hasn't exactly helped with his secret preambles and generally behaving like a Swiss banker.  Knowing the SSPX was choc full of conspiracy nuts, he should, if he understood his audience, have played it with a very straight bat from the get go.

Had he explained what, when, why, how, where and who, like any decent salesman does, he would have kept supporters onside and potentially have won MORE supporters from conservative ranks.  He's running a religious society, not MI6.

The deal hinges on 1 thing.  Trust.  No SSPX supporter trusts Rome.

If you are trying to build trust the last thing you do is behave like Secret Squirrel.

I would bet that if +Fellay had a do-over, he would have changed course on a few things. One of them is how +Williamson was handled.

But Secret Squirrel or not, I predict that a deal will not be made if not ratified by the SSPX General Council of Superiors and Elders.

Remember that he is making decisions based on the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Order members of the SSPX. John Q. Public is not directly affected by his decisions unless John Q. attends one of their chapels. And in that case, there is no contract or promise that the laity will get a vote in priestly decisions. One votes with one's feet, in that case.

How does a priestly union have "second and third orders"? 



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

[Older Salt]

does anyone know if there is a Resistance SSPX in North Carolina?